DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 20 December 2024.
Claims 1-16 are currently pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted was/were considered by the Examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Examiner note: the following 112(f) invocations have been identified by the Office.
A. "mounting element," first identified in claim 1:
the mounting element is configured for establishing a mounting interface between the radiator module and a structural part of a wind turbine having the conditioning system mounted thereon and may comprise a leg being adapted to form the connection to the structural part of the wind turbine, and the leg may have an adjustable length; or an equivalent thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 1:
The claim language, “the radiator module thereby being configurable to match a variety of wind turbine models by selectively attaching a mounting element to each selected attachment position selected among the at least two predefined attachment positions” (emphasis added) renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear what, if any, structure is required to made the radiator module configurable to match a variety of wind turbine models. For purposes of advancing prosecution, the Examiner suggests amending the claim language to instead be, “the radiator module thereby being configurable to [[match a variety of]] selectively attach to the wind turbine [[models]] by selectively attaching a mounting element to each selected attachment position selected among the at least two predefined attachment positions.”
Regarding Claim 10:
The claim language "A conditioning system for a wind turbine, the conditioning system comprising at least one radiator module according to claim 1" renders the claim indefinite because it is not clear what, if any, structure(s) are required in addition to the radiator module according to claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2-16:
Claim 2-16 are rejected by virtue of dependence on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Munk-Hansen (US 8636468), hereafter referred to as Munk-Hansen.
For clarity, please see Examiner annotated FIG. 4 of Munk-Hansen below. Claim mapping of Hansen below refers to the Examiner annotated figure below:
PNG
media_image1.png
661
822
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 1, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
A radiator module (3) for a conditioning system of a wind turbine, the radiator module (3) comprising:
a frame (6) configured to support one or more radiator elements (4), and
at least one mounting element (5) configured for establishing a mounting interface between the radiator module (3) and a structural part of a wind turbine having the conditioning system mounted thereon, the at least one mounting element (5) being attached to the frame (6),
wherein the frame (6) is provided with at least two predefined attachment positions (11), each being adapted to have a mounting element (5) attached thereto,
the radiator module (3) thereby being configurable to match a variety of wind turbine models by selectively attaching a mounting element (5) to each selected attachment position selected among the at least two predefined attachment positions (11).
Regarding Claim 2, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
The radiator module (3) according to claim 1,
wherein each mounting element (5) comprises a leg (9) being adapted to form the connection to (via support arms 7) the structural part of the wind turbine, wherein the leg (9) has an adjustable length.
Regarding Claim 3, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
The radiator module (3) according to claim 2,
wherein the mounting element (5) comprises a guiding fixture (a linear actuator is depicted in FIG. 4, thus the portion of the actuator that holds the portion that extends) configured for attachment to the frame (6) at a selected attachment position, wherein the guiding fixture (a linear actuator is depicted in FIG. 4, thus the portion of the actuator that holds the portion that extends) comprises a guideway into which the leg (9) can slide in its longitudinal direction and be fixed at a position, such that the length of the leg (9) outside the frame (6) can be set.
Regarding Claim 4, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
The radiator module (3) according to claim 1,
further comprising at least one support arm (7 in combination with B3), each configured for establishing a support connection between the radiator module (3) and a wind turbine having the conditioning system mounted thereon,
wherein the frame (6) is provided with at least two predefined support positions, each being adapted to have a support arm (7 in combination with B3) attached thereto,
wherein the at least one support arm (7 in combination with B3) interconnects one of the at least two predefined support positions and a connection position at a structural part of the wind turbine,
the connection position being arranged at a distance in front of or behind the frame (6),
the at least one support arm (7 in combination with B3) thereby extending along a direction forming an angle relative to the frame (6), the support arm (7 in combination with B3) thereby being adapted to take up forces in a direction transversely to the frame (6).
Regarding Claim 5, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
The radiator module (3) according to claim 4,
wherein the at least one support arm (7 in combination with B3) has an adjustable length (when the portion B3 is rotated the relative length of 7 in combination with B3 changes).
Regarding Claim 6, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
The radiator module (3) according to claim 4,
wherein the at least one support arm (7 in combination with B3) is attached to the frame (6) via a hinge connection (RX32).
Regarding Claim 7, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
The radiator module (3) according to claim 1,
wherein the frame (6) is further provided with at least one interface part (8) being adapted to form a frame (6)-to-frame (6) connection to an adjacent radiator module (3) according to any of the preceding claims.
Regarding Claim 8, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
The radiator module (3) according to claim 7,
wherein the at least one frame interface part (8) is configured for attachment to any of the at least two predefined attachment positions (11).
Regarding Claim 9, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
The radiator module (3) according to claim 1,
wherein the radiator module (3) comprises at least two radiator elements (4) and fluid connections (it is noted, if the radiator elements were not connected they would not perform the function of cooling the wind turbine) for fluidly interconnecting the at least two radiator elements (4).
Regarding Claim 10, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
A conditioning system for a wind turbine, the conditioning system comprising at least one radiator module (3) according to claim 1.
Regarding Claim 11, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
The conditioning system according to claim 10,
wherein the conditioning system comprises at least two radiator modules (3), and wherein the radiator elements (4) of the at least two radiator modules (3) are fluidly coupled to each other (it is noted, if the radiator elements were not connected they would not perform the function of cooling the wind turbine).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munk-Hansen (US 8636468), hereafter referred to as Munk-Hansen, in view of MacGillivray et al (US 6293499), hereafter referred to as MacGillivray.
Regarding Claim 12, Munk-Hansen discloses the following:
The radiator modules according to claim 1,
a method for configuring a radiator of a conditioning system for a wind turbine with a nacelle defining structural support points for the radiator, the method comprising the steps of:
providing, as defined, at least one radiator element (4) and at least one radiator module (3),
configuring the at least one radiator module (3) by performing the steps of:
selectively attaching a mounting element (5) to each selected attachment position, selected among the at least two predefined attachment positions (11),
where the selected attachment positions (11) match positions of structural support points of the nacelle, and
mounting at least one radiator element on the provided radiator modules (3), and
mounting the at least one radiator module (3) on the nacelle of the wind turbine by attaching the at least one mounting element (5) to the corresponding structural support points of the nacelle.
Munk-Hansen does not explicitly disclose the following:
defining thermal requirements of the radiator,
based on the defined thermal requirements, defining a number of radiator elements and a number of radiator modules according to claim 1 necessary in order to meet the defined thermal requirements,
However MacGillivray teaches the following:
it is well known in the art to define thermal requirements of the radiator, and based on the defined thermal requirements, to define a number of radiator elements and a number of radiator modules necessary in order to meet the defined thermal requirements, (see Col. 4, lines 5-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiator module, as disclosed by Munk-Hansen, wherein the number of radiator modules and radiator elements is selected based on thermal requirements, as taught by MacGillivray, with the reasonable expectation of successfully providing enough cooling (see MacGillivray Co. 4, lines 5-25).
Regarding Claim 13, Munk-Hansen as modified by MacGillivray discloses the following:
The method according to claim 12,
Munk-Hansen continues to teach the following:
wherein each mounting element (5) comprises a leg (9) with an adjustable length being adapted to be connected to (via 7) the structural support points of the nacelle of the wind turbine, and wherein the method further comprises the step of adjusting the length of each leg (9) in accordance with the position of the corresponding structural support point of the nacelle.
Regarding Claim 14, Munk-Hansen as modified by MacGillivray discloses the following:
The method according to claim 12,
Munk-Hansen continues to teach the following:
wherein the at least one radiator module (3) comprises at least one support arm (7 in combination with B3), each establishing a support connection between the radiator module (3) and the wind turbine,
wherein the frame (6) is provided with at least two predefined support positions, each being adapted to have a support arm (7 in combination with B3) attached thereto,
wherein the method further comprises mounting the at least one support arm (7 in combination with B3) at one of the at least two predefined support positions and at a connection position at a structural support point of the nacelle,
the connection position being arranged at a distance in front of or behind the frame (6), the at least one support arm (7 in combination with B3) thereby extending along a direction forming an angle relative to the frame (6), the support arm (7 in combination with B3) thereby being adapted to take up forces in a direction transversely to the frame (6).
Regarding Claim 15, Munk-Hansen as modified by MacGillivray discloses the following:
The method according to claim 12,
Munk-Hansen continues to teach the following:
wherein the step of providing at least one radiator module (3) comprises providing at least two radiator modules (3), and
wherein the method further comprises the step of forming frame (6)-to-frame (6) connections between the at least two radiator modules (3) via at least one interface part (8) formed on the frame (6)s of the at least two radiator modules (3).
Regarding Claim 16, Munk-Hansen as modified by MacGillivray discloses the following:
The wind turbine (FIG. 1 of Munk-Hansen) comprising at least one radiator module (3) according to claim 1.
Conclusion
See form No. 892 for other references pertinent to the application that may not have been cited within the Office Action.
For references which show similar radiator arrangements see Pages 1-2.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN C DELRUE whose telephone number is (313)446-6567. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday; 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM (Eastern).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nathaniel E. Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-8648. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRIAN CHRISTOPHER DELRUE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights